They also don't seem to understand black markets.
Real child porn, by it's very nature, involves some sort of abuse, therefore if it has some proximity to abusers, that is not necessarily surprising.
However, legitimate content does not involve abuse. #HumanRights #FreeSpeech
otherwise involves a sexual proliferation depicting someone's likeness w/o their (adult) consent) make sense, but more abstract and conceptual prohibitions do not (and are very problematic when it comes to #HumanRights).
For more, I have a post about various things to do with porn. #FreeSpeech
"proximity to abusers"
Not in a passive way, for instance, you wouldn't argue there is a proximity, because someone who has happened to have abused watches television. I mean, there is a dependence there, one which might appear in a community dynamic.
EPP refers to the European People's Party.
In addition, in a black market, there is no need to follow any standards or to have any values. It's not unlikely a prohibition selects out such people. Blanket prohibitions are a very bad idea and a bad form of policy. A prohibition restricting content involving abuse (or #HumanRights #FreeSpeech